Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Picked up a Quafie/Trust 6 speed dog box to use with our GTR build and i am thinking of changing the input shaft to something stronger knowing that its a weak link with drag racing.

Ive heard that the shaft sizes can be increased to Chev size and spline, we can get Jim Berry to change our clutch center to suit.

Interested to know of any recommendations for who to see for a larger/stronger billet input shaft to get made up.

Thanks in advance.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/443764-larger-billet-input-shaft/
Share on other sites

Another thing to look at is cryo treating. I am the world's biggest sceptic with regard to cryo. Having done materials science and all that jazz at uni, I know what you have to do to make atoms move around and re-arrange themselves in metal - hence why heat treatment involves getting stuff hot. Cooling stuff down to try to achieve these effects seems counter-intuitive. The cooler you make a metal, the less mobile the atoms in the crystal structure are.

But.....business across the road from me is an automatic transmission workshop that builds a lot of autos for a lot of serious drag cars. They got sick of Ford input shafts breaking in a few cars that they deal with and did some cryo treated ones. Gone from breaking them nearly every time out on a couple of cars to "not broken one since".

Anecdotal evidence, sure. But it lines up with a lot of other similar stories. They can't all be placebo now can they?

  • Like 1

PPG do a billet mainshaft with the Chevy splines, but obviously won't suit your 6 speed. Have you contacted Quaife to see what they have? We shot peen and Isotropic Superfinish (REM) components to improve fatigue resistance, and may be a good solution whether you stick with the standard shaft or get one fabricated. If you want more info on the technology have a look at our website: www.neategearboxes.com.au

  • Like 1

I will be sending Quaife a email this weekend to see what they say, somehow i dont think they will have it but i will try.

My thoughts on the 2 suggestions above, which have already run through my head before i posted....

Cryo treatment.

My thoughts are that any strengthening of the input shaft steel metallurgy will only make it more brittle and prone to crack more easily.

Possibly with a auto where the shock loads are less (as explained by GTSboy on autos) it may be a good thing, however i am suspicious to how well it would hold up in a 600Kw at all 4, 4WD manual application with a high clamp load clutch cover in a drag racing application with sticky rubber.

Making the metal stronger in my eyes, makes it more brittle, however my level of expertise in this area is old school self taught, happy to listen to corrections to my train of thoughts in this matter, my mind is open to suggestions (and education by those who know more).

Shot peening and stress relieving......there's something we use to do before after market rods were around. :)

Again, a surface depth treatment, better than standard for sure, however i dont believe it will be enough for our application.

Id be more inclined to shot peen as it improves the fatigue cracking resistance over Cryo which could produce a brittle part.

Im still thinking just getting a larger diameter billet input shaft may be the answer......just a question of where to go to get one made up.

Edited by GTRPSI

I wouldn't consider swapping the input shaft unless it was designed for you gearbox. Tooth profiles would all vary between manufacturers and you could run into a lot of trouble if you got it wrong.

In shot peening's defence, yes it's a surface treatment. So is pretty much any other process we use to make metal stronger and more fatigue resistant. That's because the vast majority of crack formation occurs on the surface. Pretty much every aerospace component is shot peened for this reason and is testament to the process's effectiveness. I'd be surprised if Quaife didn't shot peen gears anyway to be honest.

The REM process can be done to the entire gear set to reduce friction, reduce heat in the oil and so on. If you have a look on the remchem website there are a bunch of SAE papers proving the effectiveness of the process. There are some "stress relieving" characteristics as a result of the process too. A large spline option would be best though.

  • Like 1

Will the OS Giken unit fit your box?

No idea of the OS tooth profile and gear diameter compared to the Quaife one.

I wouldn't consider swapping the input shaft unless it was designed for you gearbox. Tooth profiles would all vary between manufacturers and you could run into a lot of trouble if you got it wrong.

In shot peening's defence, yes it's a surface treatment. So is pretty much any other process we use to make metal stronger and more fatigue resistant. That's because the vast majority of crack formation occurs on the surface. Pretty much every aerospace component is shot peened for this reason and is testament to the process's effectiveness. I'd be surprised if Quaife didn't shot peen gears anyway to be honest.

The REM process can be done to the entire gear set to reduce friction, reduce heat in the oil and so on. If you have a look on the remchem website there are a bunch of SAE papers proving the effectiveness of the process. There are some "stress relieving" characteristics as a result of the process too. A large spline option would be best though.

At the end of the day i may send it off for shot peening, i might ask Quaife if its already been done to it before i pull it out, good suggestion that it may have already been treated, that didn't cross my mind.

I have sent them a email asking if they make a larger input shaft, just waiting for a answer.

I spent last night researching getting a larger shaft made up, i noticed PPG mentioned they can custom make parts, will see how i go with Quaife first, then contact PPG about sending my sample to them and getting the shaft replicated to suit the Quaife gears in their larger input chev truck shaft size, hopefully they might be able to do it.

Edited by GTRPSI

I chose to leave my input shaft stock size as a bit of a safety measure. If your shockloading the drive train hard enough to break an input shaft, then your putting alot of pressure onto everything down stream. Your also shockloading the tyres...

I figured I would rather an input shaft go than start stripping gears in my ppg gearset, pulling bearings apart, twisting centre plates, body,mounts etc... I also choose to run stock input shafts in the rear for similar reasons.

...saying that, I'm not running 600rwkw yet, but I do use street drag tyres, unsprung multiplate clutch and nitrous.

I guess what I'm trying to say is choose you 'weak link'..... and plenty of very fast GTR's have been racing for alot of years with stock size input shafts.

If your looking for ultimate? then yeah go bigger, but if you go to that extent, I'd be looking at soild mounting almost everything, look at the rear geometry carefully, billet axles/half shafts (they still break) with larger Cv's.....so on and so forth.

..anyway, that's where I got with it.

Cheers

Justin

  • Like 1

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • I know why it happened and I’m embarrassed to say but I was testing the polarity of one of the led bulb to see which side was positive with a 12v battery and that’s when it decided to fry hoping I didn’t damage anything else
    • I came here to note that is a zener diode too base on the info there. Based on that, I'd also be suspicious that replacing it, and it's likely to do the same. A lot of use cases will see it used as either voltage protection, or to create a cheap but relatively stable fixed voltage supply. That would mean it has seen more voltage than it should, and has gone into voltage melt down. If there is something else in the circuit dumping out higher than it should voltages, that needs to be found too. It's quite likely they're trying to use the Zener to limit the voltage that is hitting through to the transistor beside it, so what ever goes to the zener is likely a signal, and they're using the transistor in that circuit to amplify it. Especially as it seems they've also got a capacitor across the zener. Looks like there is meant to be something "noisy" to that zener, and what ever it was, had a melt down. Looking at that picture, it also looks like there's some solder joints that really need redoing, and it might be worth having the whole board properly inspected.  Unfortunately, without being able to stick a multimeter on it, and start tracing it all out, I'm pretty much at a loss now to help. I don't even believe I have a climate control board from an R33 around here to pull apart and see if any of the circuit appears similar to give some ideas.
    • Nah - but you won't find anything on dismantling the seats in any such thing anyway.
    • Could be. Could also be that they sit around broken more. To be fair, you almost never see one driving around. I see more R chassis GTRs than the Renault ones.
    • Yeah. Nah. This is why I said My bold for my double emphasis. We're not talking about cars tuned to the edge of det here. We're talking about normal cars. Flame propagation speed and the amount of energy required to ignite the fuel are not significant factors when running at 1500-4000 rpm, and medium to light loads, like nearly every car on the road (except twin cab utes which are driven at 6k and 100% load all the time). There is no shortage of ignition energy available in any petrol engine. If there was, we'd all be in deep shit. The calorific value, on a volume basis, is significantly different, between 98 and 91, and that turns up immediately in consumption numbers. You can see the signal easily if you control for the other variables well enough, and/or collect enough stats. As to not seeing any benefit - we had a couple of EF and EL Falcons in the company fleet back in the late 90s and early 2000s. The EEC IV ECU in those things was particularly good at adding in timing as soon as knock headroom improved, which typically came from putting in some 95 or 98. The responsiveness and power improved noticeably, and the fuel consumption dropped considerably, just from going to 95. Less delta from there to 98 - almost not noticeable, compared to the big differences seen between 91 and 95. Way back in the day, when supermarkets first started selling fuel from their own stations, I did thousands of km in FNQ in a small Toyota. I can't remember if it was a Starlet or an early Yaris. Anyway - the supermarket servos were bringing in cheap fuel from Indonesia, and the other servos were still using locally refined gear. The fuel consumption was typically at least 5%, often as much as 8% worse on the Indo shit, presumably because they had a lot more oxygenated component in the brew, and were probably barely meeting the octane spec. Around the same time or maybe a bit later (like 25 years ago), I could tell the difference between Shell 98 and BP 98, and typically preferred to only use Shell then because the Skyline ran so much better on it. Years later I found the realtionship between them had swapped, as a consequence of yet more refinery closures. So I've only used BP 98 since. Although, I must say that I could not fault the odd tank of United 98 that I've run. It's probably the same stuff. It is also very important to remember that these findings are often dependent on region. With most of the refineries in Oz now dead, there's less variability in local stuff, and he majority of our fuels are not even refined here any more anyway. It probably depends more on which SE Asian refinery is currently cheapest to operate.
×
×
  • Create New...